If a word in the VMs looks like qokeey, but the
two e-s are actually connected (at the bottom)
then it can be written qok(ee)y , which, I think
is rather clear.

Cool! :-) I really like the () ligature notation, it's just a shame that it
hasn't been used more (it's not a thing I'd noticed before, but I'm sure
I'm not the only person here who hadn't).

Any glyph representation would simply have an unambiguous one-to-one
remapping to/from a bracketed EVA sequence - which is extraordinarily easy
to code/decode, even in JavaScript. :-)

To my eyes, this ease of transformability removes any need for additional
parallel VMS font renderings - loop-variant <ch>'s aside. Input it as
glyphs or EVA, n'importe quoi - but store it as strokes, with ligature
bracketing.

To have it come out ligatured
in the TT font, one should write instead:
qokEey. This is not so intuitive, but works.
VTT is a tool that can convert between the two
representations.

It's a pretty simple set of transformations, which can be done easily by
pretty much any page-generation tool (if the data exists in its database,
which is rarely the case, sadly).